Blog Stats

Flag Counter since 20091011

Hit Count Since 20110428

Posts Tagged ‘Israel’

What else can you say about a song written by a Mormon Senator from Utah with the music written by a Jewish writer of Christian Contemporary music and sung by a Syrian woman from Indiana with backup vocals by Jewish children and the Mormon Senator other than take a listen and be uplifted?

We here at Truth Before Dishonor are Conservative. We are predominantly Christian. That means beyond any shadow of a doubt we are pro-Israel and pro-Jew. This uplifting Hannukkah song is merely a representation of our love for the Jews and for Israel, and a gift to all who visit, Jew or Gentile.

We tried and failed. We on the Right worked hard to rid our government of the man who would deign to utter the words “The Future Must Not Belong to Those Who Slander the Prophet of Islam”, in complete rejection of our First Amendment and complete rejection of Judaism and Christianity. We tried and failed.

And just as we Christians and the practicing Jews here in the US are having our Religious Freedoms stripped from us by the Obama administration are left further unprotected and unsafe and unfree, so are you, Israel. You’re on your own. For the next four years, you cannot count on the US to help keep you safe from the Mohammedan terrorists surrounding you who want nothing less than your total annihilation.

You are now “a nation of unwalled cities” and only Providence can help you now. You have no friendly nations to come to your rescue.

But you still have many millions of people here in the US who are praying vehemently to Adonai on your behalf. The US will fail you, and just did. But Yahweh will not. Even as the followers of the evil, genocidal, pedophiliac, burning in Sheol Mohammed redouble their efforts to destroy you, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Joseph will be there for you. As He promised.

JERUSALEM — When the prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, drew his red line on a cartoonish diagram of a bomb from the podium of the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday, he intended to illustrate in simple terms the point at which Iran’s uranium enrichment program must be stopped, at least in Israel’s view, to thwart a final sprint to a nuclear weapon.

Instead, the attention-grabbing performance seems to have created confusion in, of all places, Israel.

Mr. Netanyahu’s bomb was divided into sections marked 70 percent and 90 percent, representing the progress Iran has made, and is expected to make, toward amassing enough enriched uranium for a bomb, Israeli officials and experts said. Mr. Netanyahu drew his red line at 90 percent, asserting that the Iranians would be 90 percent along the way by next spring or summer.

But on Friday, Yediot Aharonot, a popular newspaper, published a drastically different interpretation. It assumed, erroneously, that Mr. Netanyahu had been referring not to progress made by Iran, but to actual percentages of uranium enrichment in his diagram, now known as the “Bibi Bomb,” a reference to Mr. Netanyahu’s nickname.

Much more at the link.

Whether Prime Minister Netanyahu meant that the Iranians were 70% on the way to being able to build an atomic bomb, or he was referring to 70% enrichment having been achieved, either is worrisome. Current guesstimates have Iran with a stockpile of uranium enriched to about 20% U235, which is considered weapons usable, for a crude bomb, but as the enrichment levels get lower, the amount needed to reach a critical mass grows very large. Uranium enriched to 85% U235 is considered weapons grade. However, once 20% enrichment has been achieved, further enrichment to 90% does not take that long.

Haaretz claimed that the Prime Minister’s speech was meant much more for the Israeli public:

In his wildest fantasy, after going up to the podium to deliver his speech at the United Nations General Assembly and voicing predictable warnings about the Jewish historical plight, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu likely pictured himself pulling out a note from his blazer and reading the dramatic message:

“IDF Chief just informed me of the successful completion of an operation against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Our soldiers are on the way home with no reported casualties, holding enriched Uranium Iran has harbored in recent years. The threats on Israel, the Gulf States and the global economy have been removed. I want to take this opportunity to thank all IDF combatants for their remarkable achievement, and join me in applauding them.”

But this wild dream did not come true. IDF soldiers remained in their bases, and the enrichment of uranium persists. Netanyahu settled for the thick red marker, which he used to draw a red line on a bomb diagram he brought from home, and tried to explain to the international community where and when to stop Iran before it’s too late.

Placing Iran at the top of his agenda serves Netanyahu’s political goals well ahead of a campaign cycle in which he will be running for his third term as Israel’s premier. He is perceived by the public as the only statesman capable of confronting the Iranian challenge, and his focus on the issue has only catapulted him to the top of the polls.

Netanyahu is, as usual, attentive to his public, catering his UN speech on Thursday to polls at home, which indicate that Israelis are concerned about Iran, but think the U.S. is the one that should take the country on, not Israel. Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have not succeeded in convincing public opinion that the IDF can handle the Iranian threat on its own. The public has spoken: Not now and not alone.

Netanyahu’s speech was precisely suited to this position: He called on the international community to determine a red line on Iran – or in other words to threaten it with war – and did not proclaim that Israel would go it alone if “the world” disappoints it. Netanyahu wanted to sound resolute, just like viewers at home love, but without barking up a tree he will have a hard time climbing down from.

Mr Benn states that the Israeli public prefer that the United States take the lead on this issue, and are not inclined to support a go-it-alone position on the part of Israel.

But when facing an existential threat, Israel may not be able to afford to rely on others. The generation which survived the Holocaust is mostly gone now, and the few survivors remaining who were older than toddlers at the time are at least in their seventies, but the history is clear: when the Jews of Europe depended on other people for their survival, half of them were slaughtered, and the other half would have been had the Third Reich won the war.
_____________________________
Cross posted on THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL.
_____________________________
Added (admin): Also see Dana Pico’s Binyamin Netanyahu: “Do you want these fanatics to have nuclear weapons?”

We now have to look to foreign leaders to hear some common sense. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared on Meet the Press this morning, saying things that make sense. I’m surprised his comments weren’t cut.

Continuing his calls for the United States to join Israel in imposing “red lines” threatening military action if Iran continues to pursue weapons made from enriched uranium, Netanyahu told David Gregory that “Iran is guided by a leadership with an unbelievable fanaticism.”

“It’s the same fanaticism that you see storming your embassies today,” he added. “Do you want these fanatics to have nuclear weapons?”

He then lamented that some in the American press have vocalized opposition to Israel’s desired end to an Iranian nuclear program: “I mean I heard some people suggest, David — I actually read this in the American press — they said, ‘Well, you know, if you take action, that’s a lot worse than having Iran with nuclear weapons. Some have even said that Iran with nuclear weapons would stabilize the Middle East, stabilize the Middle East.”

“I think the people who say this have set a new standard for human stupidity,” he said of those opponents.

Bob Woodward made a very important observation on Meet the Press, that our intelligence information, that everyone’s intelligence information, is often not as accurate as they’d like to believe it is. The most well-known failure of intelligence was when the United States believed, wholeheartedly, that Iraq retained old, and was building new, chemical weapons in 2002, but it was hardly the only one. Mr Woodward stated that any claims that anyone knew, for certain, exactly how far along Iran was toward building nuclear weapons were foolish; their intelligence estimates might happen to be dead-on accurate, but they could also be very far off.

That, of course, brings up the very old military question: do you prepare for what you believe is the worst your enemies could do, or for what you believe they are most likely to do? For Israel, a nuclear-armed Iran is an existential threat, and the answer, for most intelligent people, would be that they must prepare for the worst Iran could do; if it turns out that they overprepared, then they will have wasted time and effort and money, but their nation will endure. If they decide to base their preparations on what they think their enemies are most likely to do, and they guess wrong, the consequences could be devastating.

And that is why, to Prime Minister Netanyahu, the notion that there is anything worse than an Iran armed with nuclear weapons “set(s) a new standard for human stupidity.” Armchair strategists who have the responsibility for nothing have the luxury of theorizing about what might or could or should or probably will or will not happen; the men with the actual responsibility of protecting their nations’ actual survival don’t have that luxury.
______________________________________
Cross-posted on THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL.

Like this:

I added the Flag Counter back in October of 2009 because I was interested in the outreach of Truth Before Dishonor. I wanted to know who read this decidedly American and decidedly Christian Conservative political site. And to say I’m satisfied with the geopolitical breakdown of the viewers of this site would be an understatement.

Nearly 1 in 5 viewers of this site hail from outside the US. And I am overjoyed at that number. TBD is not just reaching Americans but people from a great many countries. TBD has reached a total of 162 different countries so far. And the United Kingdom is fast approaching the point where it becomes the third nation with more than 1,000 unique viewers.

Roughly 4 out of 5 viewers of this American, Christian Conservative political site hail from the US. And I am very pleased the ratio is so low. I have seen various sites where the totals are more along the lines of 9 in 10 from the US. I am proud of the wider dissemination that TBD has. While the goal of TBD is to reach as broad an audience and as many readers as possible, to provide Truth in the ever-lasting struggle against Leftist lies, it is not strictly an American goal. If only the US has the Truth and the rest of the world suffers under Socialist lies, the world is not a better place, and the US is evermore on the brink of destruction. Thus, the 1 in 5 viewers from outside the US are very welcome and very desired here. Would that it were 1 in 4! And, while TBD has more than doubled its daily viewership this year over last year, would that that number would more than treble again.

It is my desire — and I expect the desire of every author here — that TBD makes a very real difference in the governments and lives of all peoples, whether they be Americans, Israelis (as this site is officially and decidedly pro-Israel), Canadians, Europeans, Asians, Africans, or what have you. We even love people who live in Steak-and-Kidney!

So, what is the break-down of the viewers of TBD?
Roughly 4 in 5 hail from the US.
About 1 in 30 are Canadian.
Another 1 in 50 are from the United Kingdom.
Another 1 in 80 each are from Germany and Croatia (roughly speaking).
Nearly 1 in 100 each are from Australia and India.
Israel, which has a current population of less than 8,000,000, closely mirroring the total population of Virginia, the 12th most populous state in the US, and barely over half of one percent of India’s population of 1.22 billion, still accounts for more than 1 in 250 visitors here.

Of the over 160 countries represented, 23 countries have broken the 100 unique visitor threshold.

We at Truth Before Dishonor are very appreciative of every viewer here, not only the 4 in 5 which are American, but also the 1 in 5 which are not. You are what make this site. Please, after reading the “about” and “comment policy” pages, do add your own comments and build discussions. And if you are Israeli, do read the “Pro-Israel” page. You are not alone. And rest assured, we Americans are far more Israel-friendly than our current President, and tens of millions of us are working very hard to rectify that situation. Your comments are more than welcome. They are desired.

If a very Boston crowd, a very New England crowd, a very Liberal crowd actively boos Barack Insane Obama, what do you think “fly-over country” feels about this radical Socialist race-baiting Tenth Commandment-violating gun-grabbing Catholic-hating Israel-hating Constitution-torching narcissistic false god?

The oceans began to recede.
He brought us out of darkness and into the light. (Micah, Matthew, and, according to Michelle, her husband Barack)

Dig and you find the Fluke debacle is a Manufactured Distraction (Excerpts from the Fluke Open Thread)
York Anyone who believes all that bile is a useful idiot for the Puppet Master, Soros. Let’s face it, Fluke is a manufactured crisis to distract the Proles from reality that Unemployment is back up to 9.1% – reality 15%, gas is $4 before the election instead of afterwards, price of goods are climbing, the Muddled East is ready to go nuclear along with the want of the fools there to eliminate Israel, Syria is a powderkeg, and the world is fixated on Fluck’s Fluckin Vagina. Can we spell distraction????ropelight says: In response
March 8, 2012 at 17:00
York, since I regard George Soros as a prominent useful idiot and one already marked for early execution following the communist takeover, it seems I failed to make myself clear.
Here’s an excerpt from Wikipedia on the topic: (indicates my added comments)

In political jargon, useful idiot is a pejorative term used to describe people perceived as propagandists for a cause whose goals they do not understand, who are used cynically by the leaders of the cause. (and who face summary execution once their immediate utility has expired)
The term was originally used to describe Soviet sympathizers in Western countries. The implication is that although the people in question naïvely thought of themselves as an ally of the Soviet Union, they were actually held in contempt and were being cynically used.
The use of the term in political discourse has since been extended to other propagandists, especially those who are seen to unwittingly support a malignant cause which they naively believe to be a force for good…
A similar term, “useful innocents”, is used in Austrian-American economist Ludwig von Mises’ “Planned Chaos”. Von Mises claims the term was used by communists for liberals that von Mises describes as “confused and misguided sympathizers”.
Modern usage: the term has been used by some commentators to describe people the commentators believe are effectively supporting Islamic terrorism by favouring an approach based on appeasement. Anthony Browne wrote in the British newspaper, The Times:
Elements within the British establishment were notoriously sympathetic to Hitler. Today the Islamists enjoy similar support. In the 1930s it was Edward VIII, aristocrats and the Daily Mail; this time it is left-wing activists, The Guardian and sections of the BBC. They may not want a global theocracy, but they are like the West’s apologists for the Soviet Union — useful idiots.
A 2010 BBC radio documentary lists among useful idiots of Joseph Stalin several prominent British writers including H. G. Wells and Doris Lessing, the Irish writer George Bernard Shaw, and the American journalist Walter Duranty and the
singer Paul Robeson.

York, I don’t disagree that Sandra Fluke is a manufactured distraction, but she’s only a mere pawn in the game insufficiently important to rate a footnote except as a current example of one of the organized Left’s standard tactics employed by useful idiots to deflect attention away from damaging revelations such as you listed above.

Yorkshire says:
March 8, 2012 at 17:09

Rope:
York, I don’t disagree that Sandra Fluke is a manufactured distraction, but she’s only a mere pawn in the game insufficiently important to rate a footnote except as a current example of one of the organized Left’s standard tactics employed by useful idiots to deflect attention away from damaging revelations such as you listed above.

Whether they are the Used, or are the User, I sorta see them in the same light. May not fit the term 100% but they were still USED

“By what you are also doing here, change the subject to a distraction.”

Uh-huh. So in an open thread about a young woman who was called a “slut” and a “prostitute” by Rush Limbaugh, in response to people claiming conspiracies involving George Soros and Nancy Pelosi, asking how exactly these people made Limbaugh do anything is a “distraction”?
Do you even listen to your own words these days?

What words by Limbaugh are just a reaction to the absurdidy of the whole situation. It’s what happens when you look at the 200 ft level view of things. You certainly miss the 20,000 ft view of the situation. It’s like the debate where George Stephonopolis brought up contraception in the debate. Everyone of the candidates looked at this as a question from Left Field. Why was it asked? Now we know why. It was the Libs/Socialists 20,000 ft view to lead to distraction as I pointed out above. With Pelosi involved and others, it all makes sense now. It’s easier to get the proles thinking of sex and distract them from $3.999 per gallon of gas. It also distracts from 9.1% (really near 15%) unemployment. It’s like old Rome where there was Bread, the Circus and the Gladiators to distract from the reality Rome was becoming unraveled. Well, a lot of people have caught on to the distraction. If you want to keep on talking about Rush and all those horrible people on the Right, just go ahead with your own perverted follies.

Netanyahu tells congress Israel has historically acted in its own interests against American advice; Boehner pledges Congress will never let Jewish state ‘stand alone.’

By Herb Keinon, JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT
03/07/2012 00:39

WASHINGTON – Citing historical precedents in which the US and Israel did not see eye-to-eye and Israel acted according to its own perception of its interests, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told congressional leaders Tuesday that Israel viewed things differently than the US did at times, because it was not a global power and was more vulnerable.

Israeli sources said Netanyahu, meeting congressional leaders before flying back to Israel Tuesday evening, noted that David Ben-Gurion declared independence against the advice of the US; Levi Eshkol launched a preemptive attack in 1967, against Washington’s counsel; and Menachem Begin decided to bomb the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981 despite US opposition.

America has global interests, while Israel is “on the ground and more vulnerable,” Netanyahu said in reference to Iran, saying that this made for a very different perspective.

A very different perspective! While the United States has global interests, Iran does not pose an existential threat to the United States; if Iran succeeds in building nuclear weapons, she would pose an existential threat to Israel.

This is not to say that the United States has never faced an existential threat. Russia has enough nuclear weapons, mounted on sophisticated delivery systems, to turn this country into a radioactive black hole in the ground. And while Russia seems like more of a remote threat now than the old Soviet Union was, the threat still persists.

But Americans really know very little about existential threats. The threat of a sudden Soviet nuclear attack, which was always possible, was still a sort of unrealistic, hazy, implausible, and just plain unreal thing. I am old enough to remember nuclear attack drills in kindergarten, where the teachers would have us scramble under our desks, on the red mats on which we’d take our daily kindergarten naps, but those were back in 1958, when Nikita Sergeievich Khrushchev was Premier and Cпутник was our new orbiting moon. For Americans, the existential threat was always just a threat, something never carried out, and something very unlikely to ever be carried out.

For the Israelis, an existential threat is all too real, because the Jews have faced a real, actual attempt to kill every last one of them, and though now quite elderly, there are still Holocaust survivors living in Israel. Even after the end of the Third Reich and the liberation from the concentration camps, the recovering Jews still faced real opposition in their attempt for form a new state, not just from the hostile Arabs in the Levant, but from the British, who, fearing the Arab reaction if too many Jewish refugees were allowed into the Levant, threw many of them into the Atlit detainee camp. Israel was formed again not by peaceful Jewish refugees from the devastation of Europe, but by an armed struggle against the British Mandatory Authority. This is part of the history that every Israeli child learns, is part of the culture that every Israeli knows, and is still attested to by some of the now very elderly men, and women, who fought for Israeli independence.

We Americans don’t understand the Arabs, and cannot see the appeal that political Islam has for Muslims in the Middle East. The Israelis, being much closer to Western civilization than the Arabs, are a people with whom we can more closely identify. But if we more closely identify with them, many of the Israelis really are cultural strangers to us. While we can kind of, sort of picture the Israeli settlers as analogous to our Western pioneers, they were actually quite different, rarely safe, scratching out an existence in a barren land, surrounded by hostile natives who could not be driven far off, and with the women just as responsible for the defense of the community as the men.

The Israelis are somewhat closer to us than the Arabs, culturally speaking, but only somewhat. When Prime Minister Netanyahu notes that Israel has gone its own way on certain issues of critical importance to them, it has often been because the Israelis believed there was no other choice. Some Americans believe that the Israelis ought to be willing to take chances for peace; that is easy to say when your country is safe and secure behind 3,000 miles of blue water. When your country is a small nation, one that can be driven across in an hour, it may not seem that there is a lot of room to take chances.
________________________
Cross Posted on THE FIRST STREET JOURNAL.

By Karl Vick / Jerusalem Sunday, Nov. 13, 2011 Israeli newspapers on Sunday were thick with innuendo, the front pages of the three largest dailies dominated by variations on the headline “Mysterious Explosion in Iranian Missile Base.” Turn the page, and the mystery is answered with a wink. “Who Is Responsible for Attacks on the Iranian Army?” asks Maariv, and the paper lists without further comment a half-dozen other violent setbacks to Iran’s nuclear and military nexus. For Israeli readers, the coy implication is that their own government was behind Saturday’s massive blast just outside Tehran. It is an assumption a Western intelligence source insists is correct: the Mossad — the Israeli agency charged with covert operations — did it. “Don’t believe the Iranians that it was an accident,” the official tells TIME, adding that other sabotage is being planned to impede the Iranian ability to develop and deliver a nuclear weapon. “There are more bullets in the magazine,” the official says.

The powerful blast or series of blasts — reports described an initial explosion followed by a much larger one — devastated a missile base in the gritty urban sprawl to the west of the Iranian capital. The base housed Shahab missiles, which, at their longest range, can reach Israel. Last week’s report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said Iran had experimented with removing the conventional warhead on the Shahab-3 and replacing it with one that would hold a nuclear device. Iran says the explosion was an accident that came while troops were transferring ammunition out of the depot “toward the appropriate site

Anti-virus experts last month identified a virus called “Duqu” that they said shared properties with the now famous “Stuxnet” worm, which spread across the world but is thought to have been successfully targeted at the nuclear programme’s centrifuges, the devices that enrich uranium to create nuclear fuel.

It was not clear on Monday from the Iranian statement whether Duqu had also struck nuclear facilities, but it was the first admission of damage.

“We are in the initial phase of fighting the Duqu virus,” Gholamreza Jalali, the head of Iran’s civil defence programme, said. “The final report which says which organisations the virus has spread to and what its impacts are has not been completed yet.

“All the organisations and centres that could be susceptible to being contaminated are being controlled.”

Although Mossad and other western intelligence agencies makes no comment on sabotage operations against Iran or any other country, there is little doubt that they are an important component of attempts to prevent Iran developing nuclear weapons.

Naturally, there’s no official comment from Israel, though there’s just enough unofficial bragging being leaked to let the Iranians know/fear that their suspicions are correct. Just about everyone paying any attention to this assumes that the Israelis were probably behind these things, and that’s just about the level of confirmation Israel would want. It’s kind of like the purported Israeli arsenal of nuclear weapons; everyone assumes that they have them, usually giving a number of between 100 and 200 warheads, but Israel has never confirmed nor denied the reports.

The stories quoted above follow on the heels of this one, also from The Telegraph:

Israel has refused to reassure President Barack Obama that it would warn him in advance of any pre-emptive strike on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, raising fears that it may be planning a go-it-alone attack as early as next summer.

The US leader was rebuffed last month when he demanded private guarantees that no strike would go ahead without White House notification, suggestingIsraelno longer plans to “seek Washington’s permission”, sources said. The disclosure, made by insiders briefed on a top-secret meeting between America’s most senior defence chief and Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s hawkish prime minister, comes amid concerns that Iran’s continuing progress towards nuclear weapons capability means the Jewish state has all but lost hope for a diplomatic solution.

Let’s be honest here: President Obama doesn’t trust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and vice versa. There was the famous live microphone gaffe in which French President Nicolas Sarkozy was overheard telling President Obama that he “couldn’t stand” Mr Netanyahu, and that the Israeli Prime Minister was a “liar,” a characterization with which Mr Obama expressed no disagreement. I’ve never met Mr Netanyahu, and have absolutely no idea whether President Sarkozy’s characterization is accurate or not, but it isn’t hard for me to believe that, at least when it comes to preserving the safety and security of Israel, the Prime Minister would do whatever he believed it required, with lying certainly not excluded. He is, after all, a politician.

But if I were the Prime Minister of Israel, and my government had decided that a military strike was the only way to stop the Iranians from building atomic bombs, the President of the United States, regardless of whom that might be, would be about the last person I would inform in advance: it doesn’t seem like any secrets can be kept in Washington, and a secret like that would be way to interesting to expect it to be kept secret. In a town where a Deputy Secretary of State can gossip with a reporter about a spy’s secret identity, and literally think nothing of it until it blows up in his face, it’s easy enough picturing this making the rounds at one of Sally Quinn’s parties. Washington is too much a town all about talk; Israel is a country which actually gets things done.

Assuming that all of these stories are true, it looks like Israel really has decided that diplomacy will not keep Iran from building nuclear weapons, and that a nuclear-armed Iran is an intolerable situation. But it also looks like Israel has found methods of at least delaying Iran’s ability to build and deliver atomic bombs other than an open military attack. That’s pretty smart.

Like this:

The Palestinians are trying to force UN recognition of them as a Nation. That cannot happen else Israel will indeed be faced with another war for her survival. Let’s look at some facts, shall we?

The Weekly Standard (HT Hot Air Headlines) has the logo of the “Permanent Observer Mission of Palestine to the United Nations” straight off their webpage, which I will not link because I don’t want to help publicize their hate-filled site.

Israeli land without Israel

Absent from the logo is any hint that Palestine consists of anything other than Arab territory. No nod is given even to the U.N.’s 1948 decision to divide the region into Jewish and Arab sectors. As for the shape of Israel by the time it was forced into waging the defensive Six Day war in 1967: irrelevant. The logo illustrates that the Palestinian bid before the U.N. for support of a unilateral declaration of statehood is disingenuous and dangerous.

There is not too much left to the imagination here: Israel is “wiped off the map.”

The root of the conflict is not that Israel currently controls the West Bank. The root of the conflict is that the Palestinians and their allies are still unwilling to accept that Israel exists at all.

Obama assured the rise of Hamas? Hamas has already risen. Obama legitimated violence in the pursuit of Palestinian political goals? Have you been sleeping the last 60 years? Really, can’t The Atlantic do better than this nonsense? Bring back Andrew Sullivan, the relative voice of sanity.

The “occupation” is the cause of all the problems?. Oh wait, Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza and Gaza now is an Iranian missile base. Oh wait, the effort to drive the Jews into the sea started before the 1967 war, indeed, prior to the creation of Israel; just ask the Jews who used to live in the centuries-old Jewish community in Hebron before the 1929 Arab riots and massacre. Oh wait, Hamas does not agree to the existence of Israel. Oh wait, Abbas said just a few weeks ago he never — as in never — will accept Israel as a Jewish state.

Land for peace is risky enough; land without peace is a suicide pact.

And Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader of the West Bank who will never accept Israel as a Jewish state, has been declared to be one of the “moderate” Mohammedans in the region.

Israel — like the Jewish people for centuries — has become the fall guy for people who prefer their anti-Semitism cloaked in diplomatic niceties. The Palestinians could have peace any time they wish and probably a state, too, if they acknowledged Israel’s right to exist and practiced verbal, religious and military disarmament. One has a right to question the veracity of a people who claim they want peace, while remaining active in ideological, theological and military warfare aimed at its publicly stated objective: the eradication of the Jewish state.
…Before Israel is allowed to disappear again (as Palestinian maps and school textbooks already depict) and the Jews who survive are sent into exile (who would take them?), it is worth noting a few of the numerous contributions Israel has made to the world, compared to what the Arab-Muslim-Palestinian culture has contributed.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad once again denied the Holocaust ever happened on the floor of the UN today. The man who is pumping massive amounts of military grade weapons into Syria, Lebanon, the West Bank, Gaza so Mohammedan Terrorists can keep murdering Israelis continues to be a Holocaust denier, believing the history is all made up by Westerners and Jew-lovers.

No, since the Reconstitution of Israel, these people have been all about wiping Israel off the map. Even before the Reconstitution of Israel, these people have been all about the genocidal eradication of the Jews.

Israel won the Sinai Peninsula in a defensive war against Egypt. Israel offered it back to Egypt in return for a Peace Treaty. Israel offered Jordan a continuous supply of water, huge amounts continuously flowing out of Israel and into Jordan, for a Peace Treaty with Jordan. Those two Middle East countries are the only two who have agreed to peace with Israel. Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza and got in return Palestinians stepping up their terrorist attacks on Israel.

As the radical Leftist commenter at Common Sense Political Thought (Perry) constantly says, don’t look at Israel; look at the other side. Well, I have looked at the other side. I have examined the histo-facts. I have examined current events. And I say it is foolhardy for anyone to require Israel to negotiate with terrorists who want nothing less than the annihilation of Israel. And until the Palestinians repent of their desire to wipe Israel off the face of the map, I say do not negotiate with the genocidal terrorists.

Not only does Israel have a right to exist, but also a right to maintain a defensible border and a unified Israeli Jerusalem. To date, only two Middle East countries (Egypt and Jordan) have signed peace treaties with Israel. The remaining countries have cease-fires with Israel — an extremely different animal entirely. And as of this writing, Egypt is well on its way to eradicating its peace treaty with Israel. Many of the countries in the region refuse to acknowledge the right of Israel, Israelis, Jews to exist. And Egypt is quickly approaching that stage where it once again refuses to acknowledge the right of Israel, Israelis, Jews to exist (as it was prior to the Sadat/Begin peace treaty).

Israel has the right to proactively defend itself with overwhelming force against its enemies. Israel has the right to attack without warning, using any military means necessary, in its proactive defense. But Israel has gone “above and beyond” by giving warnings to the civilian population on more than one occasion — a very bad military strategy, but one absolutely necessary politically due to the severe anti-Israel sentiment among the world’s Leftists (but that consideration and attempt at amelioration has never had any effect on the Leftist emotionalism).

Israel further has the right to obtain and maintain buffer zones in its defense against the myriad countries and terrorist organizations arrayed against it, and to annex land into Israel Proper in its defensive travails. It is a well-known fact that Israel cannot afford to lose a single war, else it ceases to exist, while all the Mohammedan countries at animosity to Israel only need to win one war and Israel is destroyed.

Israel is the only free, democratic nation in the region. Israel is the only nation in the region that allows the free exercise of Judaism, Christianity and Mohammedanism without repercussion. Israel is the only nation in the region that allows Jews and Arabs to serve high elected offices within government. The rest of the region is far less than free. Iraq has democratic elections and a framework of democracy but the Mohammedan anti-freedom, anti-Israel, anti-America foreign insurgents prevent a true freedom and a true democratic and free society to gain any semblance of a strong foundation. Without American presence, even the shadow of democracy would quickly fade away in Iraq. The rest are Mohammedan tyrannies. Kingdoms, caliphate, terrorist-owned and caused barren land, however you wish to describe it.

Genesis 12
The Call of Abram

1 The LORD had said to Abram, “Go from your country, your people and your father’s household to the land I will show you.

2 “I will make you into a great nation,
and I will bless you;
I will make your name great,
and you will be a blessing.
3 I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you.”

Israel has been Blessed from Providence’s founding of it. And the Curse is recognized as absolutely real. While the Blessing has no consideration in my pro-Israel stance, I hold out the Curse to all who choose to side with the Mohammedans and terrorists (same thing) who fight for the destruction of Israel.

I saw the new mutant film this past Tuesday, and I was highly impressed. First of all, don’t expect a lot of consistency when it comes to X-Men film continuity; Hugh Jackman has a Wolverine cameo that will leave you asking questions, not to mention the obvious timeline of the schism between Magneto and Professor X (if they separated in the early 60s, how does that explain “The Last Stand’s” scene with a much older Magneto and Xavier visiting young Jean Grey?). But don’t let this detract from a superb story. And just what makes it superb?

The fact that I couldn’t decide who had the better argument — Magneto or Xavier.

Spoilers ahead! Continue at your own risk!

*************************************************************

The film rehashes the first X-Men film’s opening sequence where a young Erik Lehnsherr (Magneto) is forcibly separated from his parents in a Nazi death camp. We see a distraught Erik first manifesting his powers, whereupon he is then sent to Nazi doctor “Mr. Schmidt” — Kevin Bacon — who is at this time unrevealed to be a mutant himself. Schmidt demands the young Erik use his powers to move a coin … or he will shoot his mother right in front of him. When Erik fails to move the coin, Schmidt does just as he promised. A livid Erik then uses his powers to wreck the entire room, but Schmidt is not affected (we don’t know if this was on purpose or due to Schmidt’s as-yet unrevealed powers). He laughs the whole time, basking in the wonderment of the young mutant’s powers. He then gives Erik the coin that he could not move as a token of his … well, whatever it is.

Years later, in 1962, Lehnsherr is now a Nazi hunter, determined to track down and kill Schmidt. Michael Fassbender is simply outstanding as the young adult Lehnsherr. The way he projects the torment of his youth and the absolute hatred of the Nazis is spellbinding. And, of course, it is this very torment that shapes his attitudes towards homo sapiens in the “battle” between humans and mutants. And y’know what? It’s very hard to disagree with him. Lehnsherr is maniacally devoted to offing any Nazi he comes across, leading up to Schmidt. He at one point heads to Argentina on a lead, and deliciously dispatches of a trio of former Nazis with barely contained satisfaction. The only problem is that Schmidt is not there!

It’s later revealed that Schmidt is Sebastian Shaw, who, in the comics, is a wealthy industrialist and secret inner circle member of the famed Hellfire Club. Shaw’s mutant power is that he’s able to absorb massive quantities of energy and use it against others (or things) — which makes him one very tough person to kill. And this Lehnsherr learns to his regret: The first time he encounters Shaw, Shaw easily disposes of him — flicking him into the sea just as he needs to make a hasty retreat from the Coast Guard.

Eventually Charles Xavier meets up with Erik and the duo begin to track down other mutants via the fledgling Cerebro — which was created by Hank McCoy aka the Beast. (This makes perfect sense as McCoy in the comics was a genius.) Among those who join the pair are Banshee and Havok. Xavier begins a rigid training regimen for his new team, for it’s discovered that Shaw has been working with the Russians in order to start a third — nuclear — world war so that mutants can prosper and become the dominant race on the planet. During this training, it is Xavier who shows Lehnsherr — now “officially” Magneto — how to maximize his powers by “finding the place between serenity and anger.” This is an example of why Magneto, despite his big philosophical differences, feels much affection for Xavier in the first three films.

This is as far as I’ll go in describing much else in the film except for the moment you knew would eventually happen: Magneto finally executing Shaw. Shaw has donned a helmet which prevents any mental tampering (hence, Xavier cannot affect him), and Magneto’s powers are insufficient to stop Shaw as he’s just absorbed the power of a submarine’s nuclear reactor. But as Shaw is crushing the life out of Lehnsherr, Erik manages to use his power to bring forth a metal cable to remove Shaw’s helmet! This immediately allows Xavier to enter Shaw’s mind to paralyze him. And, Magneto takes advantage: He takes out the coin that Shaw/Schmidt gave him right after the Nazi killed his mother … and slowly, and inexorably, drives it through Shaw’s skull.

Personally, I was virtually yelling “YES!” out loud in the theatre. After all, Nazis do make the ultimate bad guys, so killing them rarely invokes feelings of sympathy. Which brings us to the discussion I believe director Bryan Singer wants people to have after seeing the film: Who was right — Magneto or Xavier? (Singer himself is a Jew and is openly gay, both of which are quite relevant backgrounds for anything to do with the X-Men.) In a post-film discussion with my fellow comics-loving pal Brent, I said that ultimately I would side with Xavier because I could not bring myself to kill innocent people on the premise that they might hate and/or kill me. Magneto’s anger with humanity at the end of “First Class” is at least justified because they flat-out betray the mutants after the team had just prevented World War III. Diverting all of the flotilla’s missiles was a legitimate response, in my view, although personally I would have settled on just a demonstration. Nevertheless, I’d warn humanity to leave me alone with the caveat that if you f*** with me, I’ll f*** with you.

I am sure that there were many Jews like Lehnsherr, who faced similar circumstances and would go through hell and high water to seek revenge on Nazi death camp butchers. Many of these folks ended up in Israel. Yet, Israel, for the most part, has adopted my view of the film’s argument. Officially, it tracked down Nazis who had fled justice, captured them, but gave them a full and fair trial for their crimes. But the country soon faced a Nazi-like menace — way too soon after the horror of the Holocaust: Islamist fundamentalism, utilized by the Palestinian Arabs and the adjacent countries of nascent Israel, all seeking to annihilate the Jews. Then, in 1948, and again in 1967 (the Six Day War) and 1973 (the Yom Kippur War), not to mention myriad smaller “skirmishes” in between and after, the Jewish state responded with the aforementioned “You f*** with me, I’ll f*** with you” attitude. The killers of the Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics felt the wrath of this attitude, and very rightly so.

If the Jewish state had 100% adopted Professor Xavier’s philosophy, it is arguable that Israel might not exist today. If it had 100% adopted Lehnsherr’s (Magneto’s) philosophy, Israel’s territory might be 100 times what it is now, but it would be a pariah state for its actions in so doing. I suppose my point is, Israel, having been founded largely as a result of the butchery of the Holocaust (and with it obviously still fresh in its collective mind), has shown utterly remarkable restraint since its genesis against those who would continue where the Nazis left off. For all the times they’ve been attacked, for how they’re portrayed in the Islamic world, what exactly have they done that even today generates so much outright hatred towards them? Kept some of the land that used to belong to some of its attackers? That’s it!! From where I sit, I wouldn’t fault Israel if it had adopted a much more Lehnsherr-ian line against those who would see her destroyed. Yet, that is the very essence of humanity — of compassion — we see each and every day exhibited by Jewish state: After what they endured as a people throughout the 30s and early 40s, and continued to endure after they established their homeland, they, again, demonstrate the very definition of “humanity.” They could have, many times, utterly vanquished their would-be killers. They did not. They have vigorous debates each and every day about the rightness of their actions with regards to the Palestinians and other Arabs, trying to track down that virtually impossible-to-find balance between freedom and security in such a situation. How many other nations must so endure?

Would that we all could match the humanity of Israel and the Jewish people.

Via Carl in Jerusalem, this can almost literally be called a Road to Damascus moment — or perhaps a Road to Hama moment, as troops loyal to Syrian strongman Bashar Assad are now surrounding the city where his father killed 10,000 people by dropping bombs on them. The Dubai-based Gulf News, which has no problem running Holocaust-denial columns on occasion and accusing Zionists and Nazis of conspiring to create a Holocaust hoax, published a column this weekend in which a Syrian journalist is shocked, shocked to discover that Arab dictators are much more brutal than Israelis have ever been…

Even so, al-Qasim tells Arabs that claims of Israeli brutality in the context of Arab treatment of their own people are just rubbish:

It is true that Israel is forcing an embargo on Gaza, but I do not think that the Israelis are preventing the Palestinians from getting their daily bread, whereas the security services in some Arab countries stopped cars carrying food from entering certain areas. Nor are the Israelis cutting off electricity, telephone and other communication services from houses, hospitals and schools.

It has been reported that the security services stopped nurses and doctors from treating the injured during certain Arab demonstrations as a punishment for rising against the ruling regime. The thugs contracted by the police to help quell protests went even further. They shot at ambulances.

Unlike in some Arab countries, Arabs living inside Israel can organise sit-ins very comfortably. And when the Israeli police intervenes, they never beat demonstrators to death. And if we compare how Israel treats Shaikh Raed Salah with the way some Arab dictators treat their opponents, we will be horribly surprised, as the Israelis are very much less brutal.

…
Al-Qasim concludes with an even more honest context:

Israel can always claim it is facing an enemy, whereas Arab dictators are facing their own people.

Israel is facing an enemy — an enemy that wants to exterminate them — and yet act with much more humanity than their enemies. That’s not shocking to the rest of the world. Maybe Arabs should start asking themselves why they’re just discovering this, and why they’re at war with Israel rather than the dictators that oppress them.

So, a Syrian journalist writing for an Arab newspaper that is willing to push Holocaust Denial begins to face facts: Arab dictators (and the Libyan dictator) are far more brutal and far less interested in human life than [people claim] the Israelis are. That’s a definite step in the right direction. Now, if he could only continue on for fuller truth: that the claims of Israeli brutality and disdain for human life are lies perpetrated by Israel’s enemies. Even so, Al Qasim goes far beyond what the American Left is willing do to face up to the actual truth. It doesn’t fit Teh Narrative, so the American Left will continue to ignore the ugly truth about their Middle East champions and the ugly truth about their own misrepresentation of Israeli activities, past, present and future.